Los Angeles daily herald., 1887-10-26
PERKINS vs.. BALDWIN.
This Celebrated Case at an
End.
HOW 1T WAS DONE.
Full Particulars Of the DenOue-
ment in the Great Breach
of Promise Case.
HOW 1T WAS DONE.

The suit of Miss Louise c. Perkins
wherein she sued the California
millionaire, E. J. Baldwin, or Lucky
Baldwin" for 100000 for breach
of promise to marry her, is in all its
elements the most unique on record
Mr.. Baldwin had ceased to have any
relation with the girl for long period
She went no more to his house, noi
did she accompany him on trips tc
San Francisco, the races or elsewhere
and the defendant had been married
for a very considerable period to an
other when Miss Perkins brought the
suit. When this suit was about to be
begun, Miss Perkins was in San Diego
with a young man, and it was repre-.
sented that they were pass
ing as man and wife in
that place, when Louise was
brought back here ostensibly at the in
stance of her mother, on a charge OF
petit larceny for stealing a watch.
This charge was at once dismissed as
soon as her presence in this county
was secured, together with her active
assistance in the suit against Baldwin
for the big salve to her wounded heart.
The details of the trial are known to
the tens OF thousands who read the
Los Angeles papers, and the more sa-
lient points OF the famous case are
known to the tens of millions who
read papers in all the cities OF
the Union. At the end of the
trial the jury rendered a verdict
for $4,000, the largest sum ever
yet awarded to any woman on a sim
liar plea. Miss Eleanor Fortescue
had secured a verdict for $50 900 from
Lord Garmoyle in an English Court.
The fact brought out on the trial that
the defendant had been improperly
intimate with the fair plaintiff, is sup
posed to have had something to do
with this award of damages. 1t was
more than even her own lawyers
probably expected to get.
OF course the millionaire did not
pay the award. He at once began the
legal maneuvres for new trial.
Judge Cheney passed on the petition,
as the Judge who had tried the case
was no longer on the bench. The
time for the new trial was
approaching when the biggest
sensation in the case came to light,
in a compromise effected between the
parties whereby Miss Perkins agreed
to the dismissal of the case for the
sum of $1,000, paid to her by the
agent of Mr.. Baldwin. This was on
the 28th of last June. The day of the
trial arrived, and speculation was wild
as to the outcome OF the case. Then
came a second sensation in the reap
pearance of the fair but tickle defend
ant who having sacrificed the inter-
ests of her attorneys for bird in the
hand, which she preferred to all the
feathered tribe in the bush, now went
back on her agreement. Her attor-
neyshad expressedt their determination
to prosecute the case in spite of her
detection; but how that could be done
was not very evident even to the law
yers. The recapture OF the fitting
Louise made their case a little less
distracting; and with her to the fore
movements were made looking to a
complete reopening of the case. The
case was set for an early day and
much interest was awake. as to what
course matters would take when it
was called up in court once more.
THE DENoUMEET.
The proceedings had on Monday
last put all speculatious at rest, and
show that those who made the COM
promise with Miss Perkins did much
better lothian theyhad gotten the cred
it for. In brief, the young wOman's at
torneys confess that they were forced
to abide by that bargain. All sorts OF
stories were set afloat as to its being
accomplished by gross fraud on the
part of Baldwin's agents, but the re-
suit would seem to lead to another
conclusion. On Monday a paper was
filed in the Clerks Office signed by
Miss Perkins and her attorneys agree
ing to the dismissal of the case. This
was given to deputy Clerk with the
request that it be kept secret for
awhile. 1t was kept so as far
as this paper was concerned, but
some deputy Clerk took care
that it should be made public
through other channels. The Clerks
Office should not be prostituted to
such small ends. All that is there is
public property, and its records
should not be 80 unfairly twisted as to
deprive one paper of their use, while
thev are an open book to reporters
for other journals, in which the
officials may have some political =
perhaps pecuniary stock. The state
ment of Mr.. Williams is given and
that is followed blythe document filed in
the case. A perusal of the two will
show that the agreement of June 2Sth
is carried out. to all intents
and purposes. Miss Perkins gets $4,000
more money. She made over $4,000
to her lawyers which will just about
recoup them for the expenses they
were at in producing witnesses and
other expenses incident to the trial.
Mr.. Perkins is left net $4,000.
HER CoUNsEL's s STATEMENT.
A representative of the HERALD
called on Mr.. w. 7. Williams yester-
day, and asked him as to what the
terms of the settlement were.
Mr.. Williams replied that Louise T..
Perkins received $14 900, that is she
received $4,000 in addition to the $l2,-
600 formerly paid to her.
In reply to the question
"Why was the case compromised? p
Mr.. Williams said: because under
the law it was necessary, before Miss
Perkins could be heard further in
court, that she return the $4,000
which she had received. This she
was unwilling to do, and her attor-
neys, under the circumstances and
considering all that had happened,
were unwilling to advance that amount
of money. Further, in our opinion
the case could not have been won,
because the public, on account of the
settlement of Miss Perkins with Bald